Erwin Tenhumberg wrote:
If Sun wanted to close the source of the project, it could just stop committing any code. Just imagine Sun had done that after the release of OpenOffice.org 1.0, how many features would you have today?
You are making the mistake of trying to convince *me* or *Nicu* that Sun is ok. The general feeling in the FOSS community is of very deep mistrust of Sun. Trying to argue with me or Nicu is burrying your head in the sand. You won't fix the problem by convincing me that Sun can be trusted. The most you will cause is that you may stop hearing about it.
Maybe I'm too short-sighted but what is the real risk???
You are risking the isolation of OpenOffice.org by not recognizing that a significant portin (the majority it seems) of the FOSS community does not trust Sun and is not willing to give Sun *ownership* of their copyright.
Consider that most FOSS projects are GPL. Ask yourself why. What's the risk? Whatever reasons you come up with, apply double to the JCA.
Empirical evidence suggests that most FOSS developers do not want companies taking what they feel an unfair advantage of their work and labour, and they choose the GPL to protect them from that. That's why the GPL and not the BSD dominates FOSS. Then ask yourself if these developers would be happy with one of the least trusted companies today having copyright ownership over their work.
This seems crystal clear to me.
Cheers, Daniel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
